Mass Fatality Identification System

extreme! by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 13:43 · Score: 5, Funny

extreme programing

One of the philosophies of extreme programming is "once and only once". Glad to see you applying this philosophy to that redundant "M"! Down with unnecessary repetition!

Re:extreme! by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 13:47 · Score: 0

Remember to Recycle, to the EXTREME -Homer Simpson
Re:extreme! by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 15:40 · Score: 0

I wonder how they test the system.
Re:extreme! by WegianWarrior · 2003-09-23 16:30 · Score: 2, Funny

If you want extreme, you should check out these extreme guys... extremly fast!

--
Everything in the world is controlled by a small, evil group to which, unfortunately, no one you know belongs.
Re:extreme! by ReardenMetal · 2003-09-23 22:08 · Score: 1

After a hard day at the office extreme programming you get down to your Extreme Ironing.
Code is done, shirt well-pressed.
Re:extreme! by kdsolutions · 2003-09-24 01:49 · Score: 0

Wait, shouldn't that be extrm pogain "once and only " so that nothing is redundant?

--
Error 666 - Satanic SCO code found in your Linux kernel.

Handy after a nuclear war by torklugnutz · 2003-09-23 13:44 · Score: 4, Funny

In the even of identification will be done in the following manner: The 30 of us that survive, that aren't cockroaches, please raise your hands.

--
Often in Error, Never in Doubt.

Re:Handy after a nuclear war by Rorschach1 · 2003-09-24 03:22 · Score: 1

Be sure to specify only one hand/claw/mutant tentacle per survivor, though, or you're going to get a miscount.

Wheeee! by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 13:44 · Score: 5, Funny

Mass fatality system! Oh boy! All of my many nefarious plans will see fruition, I just hope it's open source. Oh, it's an Identification system? Slot off /.!

Re:Wheeee! by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-24 01:29 · Score: 0

Imagine a Beowulf Cluster of mass fatalities!

Yuck... by vitalidea · 2003-09-23 13:45 · Score: 1, Flamebait

"At the Family Assistance Center, New York Police Department personnel interviewed friends and family members of victims, taking buccal swabs from family members"

Now that just seems like a painful thing to have to do on top of everything else...

--

Vital Idea

Re:Yuck... by dakryx · 2003-09-23 14:06 · Score: 2, Informative

buccal - Of or relating to the cheeks or the mouth cavity.
Re:Yuck... by kidlinux · 2003-09-24 01:43 · Score: 1

Could someone explain to me why three of these comments were tagged as flamebait?

First of all, I think jared_hanson needs a whack with a clue stick. What would make him think the parent comment was intended to be funny? It's a good point. Having ones cheeck swabbed for a DNA sample to identify a possibly destroyed or dismembered corpse would be a painful thing to have to do and think about for someone who had just lost a family member in the WTC.

Second, the two replies to hanson's comments are also valid points. It's a tragedy for sure, but doesn't even come close to ranking with the greatest tragedies of all time. I can see why the second reply was tagged as flamebait; it was a little harsh. Regardless, I'm guessing that most /. moderators are from the States.

That second comment does raise a good point though. The US needs to get over itself. Although it's difficult to blame any US citizen for thinking it was the greatest tragedy of all time, given the propaganda they're exposed to.

Just for starters, compare "9/11" to the World Wars, the Holocaust, Hiroshima (and Pearl Harbour - which in itself wasn't as bad relative to the first 2, but tragic not only because of the loss of life but because it started off the manufacturing of weapons of rediculous destruction, be they nuke, chemical, or biological), Vietnam. And that's just recent history.

If anyone is going to marked as flamebait in this thread, it should be jared_hanson, because I doubt he speaks for all US citizens here.

By the way, I'm not posting as an AC - I've got a point to make, and I'll take the karma hit for it. If anything, mod me down for being off topic.

--
-kidlinux.
Re:Yuck... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-24 01:50 · Score: 0

I agree, and as such have used all of my mod points correcting that.
Re:Yuck... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-24 05:05 · Score: 0

With people regarding it as worst tragedy ever its all relative to where you live to it. I lived on the West Coast when 9/11 occurred, the general feeling was damnit! they cancelled ___ concert tonight. Now my relatives who live on east coast royally FREAKED and were/are contantly worried about terrorism. Anyway if something happens terrible in your country of course you're going to think its more terrible thing that ever happened. Thats human nature for you, always thinking your predicament is the worst.

Cold Spring Harbor by Zelph · 2003-09-23 13:46 · Score: 0, Troll

Here we go with Cold Spring Harbor and the Eugenics research all over again. Though I guess if I were to worry about proper eugenics I would have to GET a girlfriend, let alone worry about reproduction...

am I the only one.... by MarcoAtWork · 2003-09-23 13:48 · Score: 5, Insightful

who absolutely positively -HATES- the idea of 'paired programming'? While I wholeheartedly agree with having lots of meetings and discussions during the design phase (requirements, functional spec, detailed design) and during the review phase (post mortem, code reviews) I feel that having two coders on one computer is extremely wasteful and unbelievably stressful.

When I'm in the 'zone' I can't talk with somebody else, I can't verbalize why I'm writing a code fragment the way I am writing it without getting yanked out of it. If the design is done well, and programmers are fairly equally competent, pairing two of them is going to probably be LESS productive than having only ONE, let alone two.

The only time I can see paired programming being useful would be in a tutoring way, where coder A that has lots of experience with the codebase is paired with coder B that has never seen it, but this is more for getting coder B up to speed rather than to improve productivity and code quality.

--
-- the cake is a lie

Re:am I the only one.... by B3ryllium · 2003-09-23 13:52 · Score: 2, Insightful

I think that extreme programming really only works when people are having a hard time initially getting in to 'the zone'. It helps to have someone to bounce ideas off of, when you hit stumbling blocks on the code. Using the same computer is stupid, but extreme programming over, say, a ping-pong table - that works great.
Re:am I the only one.... by ralico · 2003-09-23 13:54 · Score: 2, Insightful

And here I thought paired programming was a way for a company to save on hardware.

--

SCO to Hell
Re:am I the only one.... by gazoombo · 2003-09-23 13:58 · Score: 1

I think that it is only useful if the programmers work well together. Yes i know that sounds like the most generic comment ever made about the subject but its true. If one programmer is like you are and can't talk while in the 'zone' and the other programmer is someone who always has to know what is happening like a little 2-yr-old, then no it does not work at all. But say me and my friend john get together and we take turns writing code as it comes to us and we quietly watch each other while they code and then review their code later it works very well.

--
John Hancock
Re:am I the only one.... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 14:04 · Score: 2, Interesting

While I wholeheartedly agree with having lots of meetings and discussions during the design phase (requirements, functional spec, detailed design) and during the review phase (post mortem, code reviews) I feel that having two coders on one computer is extremely wasteful and unbelievably stressful.

what? that's not extreme programming! that's regular programming! XP goes against "big up-front design" -- which is exactly why they chose it for this particular project!

xp wants: no big up-front design (just small "user stories" and maybe use cases), plus no big arduous code reviews (because of collective ownership and paired programming)!

get a clue!
Re:am I the only one.... by lawpoop · 2003-09-23 14:04 · Score: 3, Insightful

Extreme programming was designed for a team of developers. It takes a while to get in the 'zone', eh? What does your 'zone' code look like? Is it well-commented? Readable? If so, you are alright without extreme progamming.
The idea of extreme programming is that it forces you to make readable code, simply because of the fact that you're in the presence of someone else.
If you're in a project where you won't be responsible for the code you write later on, it would be a waste of time to have you write any code at all, if it takes that much time to decipher it.

--
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
-- Pablo Picasso
Re:am I the only one.... by BlueGecko · 2003-09-23 14:04 · Score: 5, Interesting

I definitely agree that having two programmers sitting next to each other is very distracting and ultimately counterproductive (at least for me). However, I have found that the Mac programming editor SubEthaEdit (formerly known as Hydra, but recently renamed due to legal issues) can be a tremendously productive alternative. In essence, you can think of it as an alternative implementation of paired programming. SubEthaEdit allows multiple users to edit a single document in real time. It uses color coding to distinguish who has added a modified what parts of the text to make real-time version tracking easy even in an highly chaotic environment, and even supports a fairly intelligent undo system. I've found that you get the benefits of paired programming (multiple people working and reviewing code at once), yet you also don't have to constantly explain everything as you're going or have that annoyance of someone leading over your shoulder, craning at the screen. Best of all, it becomes practical to have more than two people working on a single file at once. If you want, you can do NASA-style programming and have two people just searching for bugs and two people just coding. The results can be quite spectacular. SubEthaEdit may be not be everyone's cup of tea, but I'd highly recommend you at least take a look.
Re:am I the only one.... by kevinvee · 2003-09-23 14:13 · Score: 5, Interesting

Throughout my higher education we have had paired and extreme programming shoved down our throats. I consider myself to be a fairly competent programmer, and have worked with others that have a wide array of skill sets. It has helped me personally in dealing with people that have such a wide array of skill sets. My communication skills have improved drastically. I'm sure there are other things which factored in to this, but paired programming certainly played a big role. My experiences overall have been pleasant. This is entirely subjective. I know people that feel completely different, and will rationalize it to the end. But, when I have worked with less knowledgable programmers we are able to get tasks done in almost the same amount of time it would have taken me to do it by myself, and a small fraction of the time it would have taken the other person to do it. When I work with people that have similar capabilities, and especially when we have personalities that work well together, we are able to get a ton more accomplished together than we ever could individually. And, when I work with people more knowledgable than mine, the earlier situation is reversed and I have the opportunity to learn at an accelerated pace. The most helpful thing I have found in my paired programming experiences is to have an open mind because in that kind of a close environment your ideas and thoughts can be trampled on rather quickly, and you have to be able to accept that environment and both acknowledge that some solutions are better and be able to rationalize any decisions you are making. In my experience it is entirely worth it. The code usually has less bugs when testing, and the end product is much more understandable in terms of structure and future upkeep.
Re:am I the only one.... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 14:15 · Score: 2, Funny

My communication skills have improved drastically.

Sadly, not to the point of using paragraphs.
Re:am I the only one.... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 14:24 · Score: 0

well, hopefully the guy you have to explain stuff to does all the writing, and you just sit back and give him orders, while giving your hands a rest.
Re:am I the only one.... by panaceaa · 2003-09-23 14:38 · Score: 4, Insightful

I hate paired programming too but my roommate is a proponent of it. He says that average coders have a hard time staying on focus and are often lured by quick hacks rather than doing needed redesigns. When you pair two of these programmers together, with a stated goal of following extreme programming practices, they're ultimately more productive because they have to explain their decisions and not slack off.

But my roommate agrees, that for competent and motivated coders, who actaully know what they're doing and take pride in their work, extreme programming's paired programming fails. However, the software industry is not filled with competent and motivated coders. Most software developers graduated in CS for the money, without writing a lick of code before CS 101, and they could use a good deal of oversight.

--
my blog
Re:am I the only one.... by marko123 · 2003-09-23 14:46 · Score: 2

When I'm in the "zone" I make absolutely sure that all thoughts and reasoning gets documented as I code, and in an external document of notes.

Otherwise, you run the danger of looking at the code later, and not being in that mental ecstacy of understanding everything at once, and wondering why you wrote what you did, mainly because you had conceived of a frightfully, inhumanly efficient and clever way of doing something that no human may ever imagine again.

--
http://pcblues.com - Digits and Wood
Re:am I the only one.... by marko123 · 2003-09-23 14:48 · Score: 4, Funny

I'll look at it, but I can imagine myself just pissing off my programming partner by inserting characters right where her cursor is until she smashes the backspace key... on my head.

--
http://pcblues.com - Digits and Wood
Re:am I the only one.... by monkeyboy87 · 2003-09-23 15:00 · Score: 3, Insightful

Why do you find it stressful? because you have to share space with another carbon unit? yes, there are situations where pairings can lead to friction - for me if the "pair" is a slow or hunt/peck typer i insist on driving.
on the upside you get the following benefits:
0) two people looking/reviewing the code as its written you get a review/concensus of two people thinking the code as written was a good idea. vs a guy alone in an office who creates something only they can understand/debug/modify which then has to be justified to the group after the time/cost/effort have been expended. I am sure you have reviewed code after it was written and walked away saying "WTF was Ken thinking when he wrote this POS!" With pairing you can keep Ken from polluting the code base or if nothing else be his accomplice in his misdeeds.
1) you aren't likely to "launch make" to justify surfing with someone in your office. while you might be dedicated to being productive you can probably name 2-3 people in cubes/offices around who are more "wired" than working.
2) As someone pointed out it can help facilitate rehabilitating weaker team members who (if they have a clue) will gain from the experience locked away inside the stronger more gifted programmers.
On the otherside if you hate the "working in pairs bit", you can still adopt the other things XP advocates like test driven/test first programming you and can get a quantum leap in reliablity. I always look at XP as the manfestation of Demmings TQC/TQM applied to programming.
Re:am I the only one.... by Halo- · 2003-09-23 15:09 · Score: 1

You know, it's funny.... I've never done any "extreme" programming, and I too tend to get into the "do-not-talk-to-me-I'm-coding" mode. None the less, I've always been interested in trying XP or one of its variants. When I was a child, I spent countless hours programming in pairs with a succession of older, smarter kids. I really think that those early sessions played a huge part in my life. So, maybe the company doesn't win, but I wouldn't mind... :)
Re:am I the only one.... by aricusmaximus · 2003-09-23 15:48 · Score: 2, Funny

"Otherwise, you run the danger of looking at the code later, and not being in that mental ecstacy of understanding everything at once"...

okay, someone has to stop coding while on LSD...

"conceived of a frightfully, inhumanly efficient and clever way of doing something that no human may ever imagine again."

Okay, and I imagine this happens to you, how many times a day? Month? Year? Lifetime? And of those times, what percentage of the time do you look back and wonder what the hell you were smoking? Or worse yet, have to come back to your "clever code" and modify it? Perhaps having someone else there to provide sanity checks might help?

Unless it's a solo poject for pure comp-sci research (and even then you're going to have to write a paper on it), your code doesn't exist in a vacuum. Whatever "clever" code you make will be a headache to whomever has to come afterwards to change, modify, or maintain it. Especially if it's "something that no human may ever imagine again."
Re:am I the only one.... by Elfan · 2003-09-23 16:21 · Score: 1

He says that average coders have a hard time staying on focus and are often lured by quick hacks rather than doing needed redesigns.

I agree with the rest of what you said (I'm having XP shoved down my throat as well) except this. I find that weather working alone or paired my programs tend to become messy hacks while I'm working on them and clean up afterwards. However, XP tends to make the redesigns less likely to happen if for not other reason than you know have to convince twice as many people that that nasty mess of code needs to be completely redone.
Re:am I the only one.... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 16:44 · Score: 0

Pair programming was a term from when developers were programmers. Pair programming is pair development - including architecture, design, etc. Pair programming isn't just two guys sitting around a computer, it's in all stages, and naturally will grow or shrink in numbers as needed.

Then again, you appear to be insane or overstating your case. Pair programming/development is extremely stressful? Well - yeah, if the other guy has a chainsaw I guess it could be. If you're two adults about the matter however then you can say "I'll do this" and the other will find something else to do for a few minutes.

You know that story that a slashdot user wrote about an old school linux user setting up a modem through editing text files vs a new user who clicked a few buttons -- it's not just about mentoring, and the old programmers can learn too. In pair programming people might not know about refactoring software, others might. This also means that even in short terms like a month later you have programmers who will be better, and will be more friendly with others and discussing ways of doing things (pair programming encourages sharing info).
Re:am I the only one.... by marko123 · 2003-09-23 16:57 · Score: 1

I _was_ exaggerating to make a point :)

In a team I code as simply as possible. I think lots of lines of simple code is easier to maintain than clever programs in a single line, even if both ways are documented.

Oh yeah, I have tried coding on LSD (computer science and uni life). The screen looked awesome, but I couldn't type much in, and what I typed in didn't make any sense.

--
http://pcblues.com - Digits and Wood
Re:am I the only one.... by tamnir · 2003-09-23 19:09 · Score: 2, Interesting

I have been doing extreme programming for 4 years, and I started with pair programming. Since from the wording of your comment, I take it you haven't tried pair programming for yourself, please, allow me to share my experience.

First, let me begin with how I started pair programming:

I started pair programming in the tutoring way you describe. I was "coder B" in your scenario: fresh out of university, I just joined a development team between projects, so there wasn't too much pressure. But the environment and tools used were mostly new to me. Our team wasn't doing any Extreme Programming at that time, but our "Coder A" read about it and wanted to try it out. There are serveral practices in Extreme Programming, and pair programming was the one he found the most intruiguing. Since I was the newbie, he wanted to use me as a guinea pig to see if he could bring me up to speed faster.

Like you, I really wasn't convinced at first, but he was the guru, and me just a newbie, I really couldn't refuse. So after a few days, I finally accepted and reluctantly sat next to him in front of his console. All I would do for now is watch, while Coder A codes stuff and explains what he is doing so that I can follow what is going on. Luckily, it was some Python code. Even I at that time I hadn't even heard of Python, I could kind of figure out what was going on in a particular loop. But I had no idea about the higher level of the design, and the first pair programming session was very painful. After 2 hours, my head was about to explode. I did learn a few things about Python, but that was about it.

The next day, we tried again. I was even more reluctant given the previous bad experience, but anyway, I sat down, repressing a sigh. Again, painful time, headache... But somehow, the code structure started to appear to me, like pieces of a puzzle magically putting themselves together. But one piece wasn't fitting. Coder A was stuck on a problem and asked me if I had any idea. Again, I wasn't even sure what was going on, I had only a very high level and blurry view of the system. Yet, somehow, I could see the problem with that piece had something to do with granularity. Being a newbie talking to the guru, I sheepishly apologized for not being sure what a certain function really did, but suggested anyway adding an argument and removing a certain loop. I really had no idea what I was saying. Just, in my blurry picture, that would make the puzzle piece fit. Coder A pondered the idea for a few seconds, then his eyes popped wide open and he exclaimed: "You're a genius!". Then he went into a coding frenzy by himself and I was lost again, but I knew something special happened there. Sure, that was in a tutoring setup you described, but that is actually a generality of pair programming: while the driver (the coder at the keyboard) takes care of the low level details, the navigator (the coder watching) keeps track of the higher levels of the implementation, and thus can point the driver in the right direction.

Now, let me answer your concerns with what I have learned from practicing pair programming:

Wasteful:
You do loose some raw speed from having only one keyboard typed on instead of two, but actually not that much: whenever you get stuck on something, pair programming gets you unstuck really quick. In raw lines of code per hour, I think the loss is something around 15%. But this is largely made up for in code quality. I found that pairs produce much higher quality code than individual programmers. Therefore, you also save time on debugging and code maintenance.

Stressful:
It can be at times. See my first session of pair programming. First thing: pair program with someone you get along with well. After you got used to them, pair programming sessions are still very intense, since they keep you totally focused, with constant peer review, for the 2 hours they usually last.
However, I found an overall reduction in stress level thanks to pair programming. It's a bit like doing a lot of sports h

--
I code, therefore I am.
Re:am I the only one.... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 19:29 · Score: 0

Good post. Thanks for the input.
Re:am I the only one.... by Saeger · 2003-09-23 19:35 · Score: 1

I knew Hydra sounded familiar. Once in a blue moon I have a need for a collaborative network text editor (hydra is at the top), but nothing ever really fit the bill and "just worked" (besides those dead-simple java whiteboards). A lot of what I find is just research papers on this subject. Demand mustn't be too high for this kind of groupware.
--

--
Power to the Peaceful
Re:am I the only one.... by torpor · 2003-09-23 20:34 · Score: 2, Insightful

Well, then you wouldn't be a 'programmer', you'd be more like a ... husband, or something.

But seriously: SubEthaEdit rawks hardcore. Put two people together to work on the same code together, and it can make for some really nice results ... you have to think of it more as a team scenario, constantly communicating and discussing things -as needed- and then working around/with each other too. It can go like this:

Programmer Bob - "Okay, I'll do all the util code today for module_XXX - load/save/parse/etc."

Programmer Jane - "As you start to get that stuff working, I'll do the structural work for the major logic."

You can really work efficiently this way, because by having another person to talk things through you can get a structure/organized state very rapidly.

Many programmers have a difficult time laying out their app structure individually, choosing to 'evolve' the framework of their app as they figure things out - paired programming is designed to overcome the 'flaying around blindly' aspect of design, by giving you another pair of eyes.

Done right, it can be very, very, very efficient. But, of course, as with anything: it can also be a pain in the ass.

--
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
Re:am I the only one.... by leoboiko · 2003-09-23 22:39 · Score: 1

Althought I never tried "extreme programming" or other buzzwords, I always programmed in pair with friends and coworkers. When both of we are "in zone" I can't really feel any difference between my ideas and their ideas; it's just "ideas" with are implemented in code.

I can't verbalize why I'm writing a code fragment the way I am writing it...
I can and, in fact, I do it to myself all the time. So when I'm pair programming I just speak aloud my personal monologue. The "why" is usually short and interesting, and the "how" can be communicated throught code.

While maybe our team code produce more amount of code working separately, I definitly see a good amount of improvement in code quality when we work together on the same code.

While I wholeheartedly agree with having lots of meetings and discussions during the design phase (requirements, functional spec, detailed design) and during the review phase (post mortem, code reviews)
And this is where we see my style is exactly the opposite of you. I think detailed design, specs, code reviews are worth nothing. In my experience all this bureaucracy never really was useful to anything. Detailed design, for example, implies that you know in advance what you will do and what are the requeriments, and this has never been the case.

Instead of wasting my time with corporate cruft, I'm much more productive using some language wich allows fast prototyping, quick redesign, quick fixing of errors and incremental development.

I guess this goes to show how people code differently :)

--
Prescriptive grammar:linguistics :: alchemy:chemistry. Stop being a nazi and learn some science.
Re:am I the only one.... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 23:56 · Score: 1, Funny

Do tell me more about how carbon unit pairings lead to friction. I sense a fascinating analogy.
Re:am I the only one.... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-24 00:32 · Score: 0

The newbie should be the one typing in pair programming. That forces him to learn, and it forces the more experienced coder to explain what's going on.
Re:am I the only one.... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-24 01:55 · Score: 0

My last employer experimented with XP during preproduction (game programming). The result of pair programming was that 2 good programmers did half as much as normal with negligible effect on code quality. Overall, XP was noticeably inferior to the existing dev methodologies in use.

I always wonder what new converts were doing before they found XP, as a methodology its better than nothing (the norm for our industry) but stinks compared to well run operations. In particular simply having programmers physically close enough to discuss problems and confident enough to actually ask for help seems as effective as pair programming in overcoming problems and spreading knowledge. And unlike pair programming you can do it with more than 2 programmers at a time!
Re:am I the only one.... by drinkypoo · 2003-09-24 02:54 · Score: 1

There are easier ways to tell a girl you like her than yanking on her pigtails. If you're into the head-smashing thing though, well, whatever floats your boat.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:am I the only one.... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-24 03:41 · Score: 0

But, when I have worked with less knowledgable programmers we are able to get tasks done in almost the same amount of time it would have taken me to do it by myself, and a small fraction of the time it would have taken the other person to do it.

So, what you are saying is that pair programming has a slight increase in the amount of time it takes you to do something, and you need twice the amount of staff? Sounds positively revolutionary.
Re:am I the only one.... by ModifiedDog · 2003-09-24 03:57 · Score: 1

The reason you are more efficient pair programming than individual programming is that when someone is sitting right next to you, you both feel too guilty to refresh Slashdot every 5 minutes.
Re:am I the only one.... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-24 06:36 · Score: 0

So, what you are saying is that pair programming has a slight increase in the amount of time it takes you to do something, and you need twice the amount of staff? Sounds positively revolutionary.
Maybe if you had someone reading with you, the two of you could have understood the bits about "increased learning pace" and "work faster". I'd draw you the math but fear i may have used so many words already that numbers would again boggle your mind.
Re:am I the only one.... by krenn · 2003-09-24 07:46 · Score: 1

In your comment you said
>Most software developers graduated in CS for >the money
That reminds me of a scene in Casablanca

Renault: What brought you to Casablanca?
Rick: My health. I came to Casablanca for the waters.
Renault: The waters? What waters? We're in the desert.
Rick: I was misinformed

I imagine that those particular CS grads are similarly disappointed...
Re:am I the only one.... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-24 11:24 · Score: 0

try weed. you can write some good code, but eventually you start playing video games or looking at porn. ...wait a minute...how's that different from normal coding again?
Re:am I the only one.... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-25 05:35 · Score: 0

I think the key is in who you're paired up with.
Re:am I the only one.... by ProfKyne · 2003-09-28 06:50 · Score: 1

who absolutely positively -HATES- the idea of 'paired programming'? While I wholeheartedly agree with having lots of meetings and discussions during the design phase (requirements, functional spec, detailed design) and during the review phase (post mortem, code reviews) I feel that having two coders on one computer is extremely wasteful and unbelievably stressful.

Extreme programming moves the design and review phases into tandem with the development phases -- they all go hand in hand, not split into separate sections with "lots of meetings". You should read Robert Martin's Agile Software Development. That would give you a better sense of what it's all about.

--
"First you gotta do the truffle shuffle."

Hmm.. by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 13:50 · Score: 5, Funny

Let's see..

new technology ... check.
mass fatatilies ... check.
extreme programming ... check.

Yep, Slashdotters will love this one. :)

But... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 13:51 · Score: 2, Funny

In a clone infested future this will be useless

Re:Cash, Howard Cash by gazoombo · 2003-09-23 13:52 · Score: 5, Insightful

Approaching the second anniversary of Sept. 11, 1,521 of the 2,792 people who perished in the WTC disaster have been identified.
It does take time. Rember that every single positive ID that is made is a life that has been lost. Imagine the familes associated with these 'numbers' and mass ID. I do not appriciate your comment.

--
John Hancock

Science? by 1984 · 2003-09-23 13:55 · Score: 1, Insightful

So you don't like Extreme Programming. That's not the same thing as "Extreme Programming doesn't work" in general. You're generalizing excessively.

XP programming?? by 1000101 · 2003-09-23 13:59 · Score: 2, Interesting

From XP web site:
"Extreme Programming (XP) was created in response to problem domains whose requirements change. Your customers may not have a firm idea of what the system should do. You may have a system whose functionality is expected to change every few months. In many software environments dynamically changing requirements is the only constant. This is when XP will succeed while other methodologies do not."

I'm no expert, but isn't this exactly what OOA and OOD is all about? Isn't the whole point of OOA and OOD to get away from the "waterfall method" and allow changes in requirements, use cases, code, etc...?

Re:XP programming?? by richieb · 2003-09-23 14:15 · Score: 2, Interesting

I'm no expert, but isn't this exactly what OOA and OOD is all about? Isn't the whole point of OOA and OOD to get away from the "waterfall method" and allow changes in requirements, use cases, code, etc...?
Not really. OO is a different approach to structuring systems and is a replacement for Structured Programming.
Even with OOA and OOD people have tried to apply formal or semi-formal processes, which tend to look a lot like a waterfall approach (eg. RUP etc).
XP starts with the assumption that requirements will change and the that all requirement are not known at the time when you start building the system.

--
...richie - It is a good day to code.
Re:XP programming?? by heli0 · 2003-09-23 16:16 · Score: 1

"XP starts with the assumption that requirements will change and the that all requirement are not known at the time when you start building the system."

All is well until this happens: Coders Baffled by Satisfied Client ;)

"that's when management calls me into a meeting to tell me the client revised the specs, and I get another two weeks to work on it. But, this time the client stuck with the original spec. I'm screwed."

--
Whenever the offence inspires less horror than the punishment, the rigour of penal law is obliged to give way...
Re:XP programming?? by ca1v1n · 2003-09-23 20:21 · Score: 1

OOD is a language or meta-language level way of optimizing the way you work on the actual code itself. There is a tremendous amount of engineering that has little to do with the code itself, and this is what XP deals with. It is implicit in XP that you are using OOD, or something tantamount to it, in the case that you're using a language that is not OO.

XP is built on certain assumptions specific to software engineering, so it is an optimization of the engineering practices that every engineer follows, whether they are building a bridge or a database. XP is not very appropriate to very large projects, where the cost of prototyping and debugging after failure is very high, or completely forbidden, in the case of safety-critical applications. Since a great deal of software is neither very large nor safety-critical, these are perfectly reasonable trade-offs to make in many cases.

My software engineering professor, whose research is in software reliability, and told us horror story after horror story about aircraft avionics failures and the like, hates XP. In the fields he's looking at, the cost of prototyping and failure are astronomical. My Robocup team, which is writing code to make AI agents play soccer, has a much less strenuous safety obligation. Our cost of prototyping is equivalent to "make" which takes about as long as a trip down the hall to the snack machine, and watching a simulation, which takes about long enough to eat the bag of chips.

This is not to say that XP encourages you to write bad software. Instead, it assumes (reasonably) that all code will have defects, and attempts to maximize the probability that someone will detect them. Furthermore, it attempts to minimize the disruption to the development cycle that repairing a bug can cause. OOD is XP's preferred method of dealing with this at the source code level, so you're certainly very correct to note the similarity.

--
WARNING: there is a trojan on your

Re:Cash, Howard Cash by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 14:09 · Score: 0

1. How identifiying them bring them back? The families already know they are dead, no? I'm not flaming or trolling really, I want to know what the point of this is?? There's no use!

2. Are you not in the least worried about DNA MASS IDENTIFICATION? Imagine the use for the, uh, bad guys?

Shouldn't it be extreme design ? by tuomoks · 2003-09-23 14:17 · Score: 1, Insightful

Programming is the phase when you write the functional ideas to code, i.e. engineering ( IMHO ). On design phase I have found it wery useful to have one or more people around but when the desing is done, please, stay away. Programming is art but should not be creative art ( most of time, there are exceptions ), you just make ideas to work and it requires both skill and consentration that is difficult is you have to stop and argue..

Re:Shouldn't it be extreme design ? by William+Tanksley · 2003-09-24 06:20 · Score: 1

No, it shouldn't be extreme design, because the customer isn't going to use your design; they're going to use your program.

but when the design is done, please, stay away.

The design's not done until the customer's satisfied; and the customer's not satisfied until the software's solving all the problems. So by your criteria, you need to be pairing.

Programming is art but should not be creative art ( most of time, there are exceptions ), you just make ideas to work and it requires both skill and consentration that is difficult is you have to stop and argue.

Programming can be drudgery. Would you want to use a system built by a drudge?

Do you also advocate avoiding peer review? Or do you simply want to postpone finding the problem until after the module's been built to depend on it? With pair programming you peer review comes in real-time (from your pair) as well as after the fact (from the next person who works with you on the code, which by convention cannot be the same person who paired with you to generate the code).

Admittedly, some arguments are wastes of time; but then some webbrowsing is as well. Solo coders can't get in wasteful arguments, but pair programmers can't get into wasteful webbrowsing. You win some, you lose some. More important is what you gain.

-Billy

12 hour days? by JRManuel · 2003-09-23 14:22 · Score: 2, Informative

The article mentions how the developers worked "... arduous 12-hour programming shifts." This goes against one of XPs core practices: No Overtime. However, if a team is well-motivated (as these guys were), I think it becomes possible to stretch this rule. The second that their motivation wanes, they should switch back to a regular schedule.

Re:12 hour days? by russh347 · 2003-09-23 17:48 · Score: 1

XP practices currently include 'sustainable pace', which /may/ mean no overtime, but doesn't impose an artificial constraint. What it really means is that developers need to be responsible for their own well being so that they can be productive.

Re:Cash, Howard Cash by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 14:25 · Score: 0

Remember Kids, One death is a tradgedy, but a million deaths is a statistic!

Re:Cash, Howard Cash by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 14:29 · Score: 0

What about 1 person dying a million times?

Don't all the dead bodies lying around. . . by kfg · 2003-09-23 14:32 · Score: 1, Funny

pretty much identify it as a mass fatality? I'd think that would at least be a major clue.

Or are we going to start giving them names, like hurricanes?

"In mass fatality "Jane" today. . ."

What am I missing?

KFG

Re:Don't all the dead bodies lying around. . . by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 15:00 · Score: 0

Sad to have to explain this, but there might not be any bodies to work with... a more adequate word here would be mass annihilation.

How ironic... by BladeMelbourne · 2003-09-23 14:42 · Score: 4, Funny

Isn't it ironic that the Extreme Programming site is written in HTML 3.2 & JavaScript 1.0?

Markup languages are hardly extreme, but surely they could push the bounds of the latest standards and do something truely extreme. ;-)

Mike

Re:How ironic... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 15:53 · Score: 1, Funny

methinks you don't know what XP is all about!

extreme programming is not about any particular language, but about a way of programming.

and that way is to STRAP ON A PARACHUTE AND JUMP OUT OF AN AIRPLANE AT 5000 FEET WITH YOUR POWERBOOK, ECLIPSE IDE, AND NOTHING ELSE!

EXXXXTREEEEEME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!
Re:How ironic... by edwdig · 2003-09-25 07:58 · Score: 1

HTML 3.2 is a pretty good choice. Most obscure browsers can render HTML 3.2 just fine, but start having trouble when you go past that. HTML complexity increased a lot after 3.2.

Re:Cash, Howard Cash by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 14:44 · Score: 0

Jesus, you insensitive clod!

Remember...in extreme programming by teamhasnoi · 2003-09-23 14:49 · Score: 4, Funny

There is no 'I' in team, but there is a 'me' in extreme.

There is also a 'ramming' in programming, but I got nothin' for that.

Re:Remember...in extreme programming by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 14:55 · Score: 0

also:
groping
moping
aping...
shit! ballmer's a programmer.
Re:Remember...in extreme programming by AllenChristopher · 2003-09-24 00:53 · Score: 1

There's "rpm meter exam, gringo" in extreme programming. Does that help?
Re:Remember...in extreme programming by Idarubicin · 2003-09-24 02:51 · Score: 1

There is no 'I' in team, but there is a 'me' in extreme.
In my preferred flyspeck font, the letter I enclosed in single quotes looks exactly like a capital T...hilarity ensues...

--
~Idarubicin

Re:(Off T. ) BIG NET CRASH? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 14:52 · Score: 0

Actually, I've been noticing the same thing. I keep checking the real-time international satellite and fiber links monitor up on this Web site and you can see that the capacities are way under normal.

Re:Cash's Credibility - just reduced to Zero by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 14:56 · Score: 1, Funny

haha - even the moderation is funny - flamebait! hahahahahaha

This is a horrible idea! by the_truk_stop · 2003-09-23 14:56 · Score: 1

People, we can't tolerate the creation of things like this; with systems like this in place what's to stop people from assuming that it's alright to do illegal/immoral things like hijack planes?!

Just like the mentality Napster created for filesharing!

</sarcasm>

SubEthaEdit by monkeyboy87 · 2003-09-23 15:05 · Score: 1

Holy shit! that's the coolest editor/thing I have ever seen. Why is it that after I shed all my vestiges of Win32 for Linux do I find that all the cool shit is happening on the Mac again?!?!?! Damn, damn damn. How am I supposed to justify a Powerbook to the accounting trolls....

I know a great web page for fatalities!!! by rock_climbing_guy · 2003-09-23 15:45 · Score: 0, Troll

Go here!

http://www.mortalkombat.com

--
Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???

Mission Creep by LuYu · 2003-09-23 15:52 · Score: 2, Insightful

Could this not be used on the living as well? It would bring us closer to that frightening world we saw in Gattica.

Should we be creating identification systems that can ID people with scraps of DNA?

--
All data is speech. All speech is Free.

Re:Mission Creep by *weasel · 2003-09-24 00:44 · Score: 1

Should we be creating identification systems that can ID people with scraps of DNA?

we've already had it. Gattica was dystopian in that people were prejudged (and employed) based on the contents of their DNA. We don't have a system capable of decoding the genome of every individual.

if you want to get technical, though - that dystopia is already our reality. How many times have you been asked the medical history of your family with regards to heart/lung disease, cancer, etc. Everything that you are physically is the result of your DNA, so any system which selects/deselects candidates based on a physical attribute is effectively biased against their DNA.
(height requirements for astronauts, fitness requirements for military service, sight requirements for pilots, etc)

the only difference is, a personal DNA analysis would allow measurement of the source, as opposed to the symptom - and would be flawless.

but we have already had DNA identifications systems for quite some time. They compare two samples and determine the liklihood of a match. Can't tell squat about a single sample by itself though. Trick is, organizing a dozen to a hundred samples from about 50000 sources. That is the new software this article is talking about.

i just can't imagine them trying to do it with FileMaker Pro.... ::shudder::

--
// "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"

Re:Cash, Howard Cash by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 15:57 · Score: 0

i thought jesus only died once, much less a million times.

God bless them by The+Tyro · 2003-09-23 16:09 · Score: 2, Interesting

I have all the respect in the world for these guys... programming methods or no, what they did and are doing is priceless.

I was in New York on Sept 11... flown in on a C-141 as part of the rescue/relief effort (the rest of my Urban Search and Rescue team had to drive... I beat them there by a number of hours). That was the most unique flight I've ever been on, since by then the entire civilian air fleet had been grounded... between us and the f-15s, we were basically the only things flying... .

Closure is important, and these guys are providing it... I'd like to shake their collective hand and buy them a nice cold beer.

--
Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.

Extreme Programming is *SO* Passe by Niscenus · 2003-09-23 16:16 · Score: 1

If you want on the edge engineering for the software geek, try Leary-ism.

EP geeks are TOTAL losers.

--
"Yeah...it was the numbers that were irrational, not the murderous cult of vegetarians...." -- Hippasus of Metapontum

ride the wave of the future....don't miss out! by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 16:18 · Score: 0

now everybody remember to sell before the terror bubble bursts

To the moderator who thought this was funny: by jared_hanson · 2003-09-23 16:27 · Score: 1

Have you no sense of respect man. These people suffered one of the greatest tragedies of all time and the physical and emotional pain will continue for many years. Nothing about 9/11 is funny. You should be ashamed of yourself.

--
-- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.

Re:To the moderator who thought this was funny: by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 16:34 · Score: 0, Flamebait

3000 people? Hardly one of the greatest tragedies of all time - unless you count using it as an excuse to turn the US into even more of a police state.
Re:To the moderator who thought this was funny: by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 16:52 · Score: 0, Flamebait

Greatest tragedy of all time? You say that and AT THE SAME TIME say he hasn't got no sense for respect???

What about the Holocaust YOU STUPID FUCKING PRICK!!!

Less than 3000 people died, you must be joking.

Each year there are earthquakes or floods which kill a *multiple* of 3000 people.

You're fucking nuts, fuck you and the horse you rode on.

And you wonder why America is hated so much.

Just look in the mirror.
Re:To the moderator who thought this was funny: by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-24 03:20 · Score: 0

Comedy is tragedy plus time.
-Woody Allen
People die. Deal with it.
Re:To the moderator who thought this was funny: by kelnos · 2003-09-24 07:10 · Score: 2, Insightful

i'm sure i'll get modded as flamebait like the others, but so be it.

have a little perspective! the attacks of 9/11 were terrible, to be sure, and i'm both sorry for those that lost friends and family, as well as thankful i didn't lose anyone i know. but one of the worst tragedies ever? hardly. look at history - the holocaust comes to mind. think of those that have died in slavery - no, i don't have exact numbers. how about natural disasters? a single earthquake, flood, etc. has often resulted in much larger loss of life. how about people - children, even - that die in less-developed countries every day due to malnutrition and easily-curable diseases?

the 9/11 attack has had so much spin put on it it's ridiculous. a terrible, horrifying occurrence, yes. the worst thing to happen ever, no. and i'm sure saying that makes me "unamerican" or some silly thing like that. my country disappoints me sometimes.

--
Xfce: Lighter than some, heavier than others. Just right.
Re:To the moderator who thought this was funny: by jared_hanson · 2003-09-24 10:07 · Score: 1

You're the only non anonymous reply, so I will reply to you. I do think it was one of the worst tragedies. That is also a pretty relative statement.

Consider all the minor tragedies. You're kid breaks his arm, you're girlfriend breaks up with you and you are upset. There are so many tragedies, that anything of significance is "one of the worst." I can't believe the replies railing on me for that statement. Worse than the Halocaust, no, but it's horrible. Come on and show a little respect.

--
-- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.
Re:To the moderator who thought this was funny: by Ataeagina · 2003-09-24 16:49 · Score: 1

You consider your girlfriend breaking up with you a tragedy? You need to watch some international news, my friend. People die in horrible manners every single day. That's a tragedy.

--
We're siamese children created by heart. Nothing, nothing can tear us apart.
Re:To the moderator who thought this was funny: by instarx · 2003-09-24 22:20 · Score: 1

Anonymous Coward was created by slashdot to be humorous, but in your case it fits like a glove.

Re:Cash's Credibility - just reduced to Zero by bendude · 2003-09-23 16:42 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Flaimbait???
Troll???

This is a serious comment. Who the hell is moderating today? The CIA?? Mossad??

--

Get the Hell off my planet, you slimy mobster Bush!

Buy them some source code control.... by malakai · 2003-09-23 16:57 · Score: 1

Occasional relief came in the form of some old toys lying around the office. A boxing nun became their "integration token." Staff could submit source code changes, but only if they had the nun.

They never mentioned what platform/language this is written in, but the id of having to pass around a token to be able to communicate is so... so... Token Ring.

-malakai

--
-Malakai
A Dragon Lives in my Garage

Re:Buy them some source code control.... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-24 01:19 · Score: 0

Windows. C#. SqlServer. Perforce.

But I liked "token ring".

Re:i fail it by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 17:13 · Score: 0

i for one welcome our new mass fatality identifying overlords

chimps by picardsb · 2003-09-23 17:24 · Score: 1

i wanna know which chimp i'm related to. hopefully my geneology does not end up with some other evolved chimps runnnig amok!

apparently... by utexaspunk · 2003-09-23 17:41 · Score: 1

it looks to me like they're not that hard to identify (sorry, it was the first thing that came to mind)

M-Fart by matthew.thompson · 2003-09-23 20:43 · Score: 1

Funnily enough the company I work for had an arm that was called FISYS - we changed the name when we discovered that fisys mean Fart in one of the scandinavian languages.

--
Matt Thompson - Actuality - Insert product here.

goatse! by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 21:53 · Score: 0

host 198.247.175.96 => goatse

99.9% accuracy by I+don't+want+to+spen · 2003-09-23 22:23 · Score: 1

Now this sounds good, but that's one error in a thousand so we can suppose at least three mis-identifications for the September 11th event. I know that no system is perfect, but the distress that this could cause would seem to demand even greater accuracy.

--
Don't go to a brothel if you want to buy broth

Re:Cash, Howard Cash by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-23 23:12 · Score: 0

If hell is your darkest moment, Jesus's darkest moment was his moment of doubt on the cross, after which he descsended into hell. He could have suffured an eternity of dying in the 2 days that he was there, then he came back so that we could eat chocolate easter bunnies. Bitchin!

Necessity is the Mother... by egommer · 2003-09-24 00:35 · Score: 1

I understand that necessity can be the Mother of Invention. Does't anyone else think it's very disturbing that we should learn to accept living in a time where this particular invention is rather useful.

--
Two Towers-Two Worlds.One seeks triumphs and freedom for man.The other deems man unworthy and wrecks them.

Good article by goretexguy · 2003-09-24 01:55 · Score: 1

Bob Shaler came to my workplace just a couple days ago and talked about this software and how it helped with the ID process. Great presentation.

MFISys was crucial to juggling all the forensic DNA data generated by Bode, Celera, Myriad and others.

Hats off to the programmers- and the practices- that got this software together so quickly. I'd very much like to see XP accepted by other software houses; this is just another example of how XP can turn out great results in a fraction of the time.

I'd rather not know some things by Hoi+Polloi · 2003-09-24 02:08 · Score: 1

"Here you go, we definately identified this chunk of muscle and fat found at the scene as your late uncle."

"Uhhhh, thanks..."

--
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning

not a joking matter by weileong · 2003-09-24 02:11 · Score: 1

It's a pretty fucked up world we're living in where there's even a need for a "Mass Fatality" identification system.

All those people cracking jokes need to sit down and think a bit about it. If there was any topic that warranted serious discussion/comments, this is it.

There are several good posts about the programming issues etc., but why are so many mods wasting their mod points modding up so called "funny" posts?

Re:not a joking matter by goretexguy · 2003-09-24 04:39 · Score: 1

The world still needs tools like this (Genetic ID, MFISys) because we still have things like earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, plane crashes and so forth.

The NYC Medical Examiners Office was buried under the WTC mess (no pun intended) when that other plane crashed shortly after takeoff. With the tools already in hand, OCME was able to ID all the plane crash victims in less than 30 days. Not bad at all, considering the case load they already had.
Re:not a joking matter by ctaylor · 2003-09-24 04:46 · Score: 2, Insightful

"There are several good posts about the programming issues etc., but why are so many mods wasting their mod points modding up so called "funny" posts?"

Because humor is one way for humans to deal with tragedy.
Re:not a joking matter by Anonymous Coward · 2003-09-24 08:19 · Score: 0

To the contrary, I am a Firefighter/EMT. We use the morbid humor as a pressure relief valve.
Where we do it is important, ie. NOT in front of bystanders/families. We live in the same communities, we know a lot of our patients and 'recoveries'.
Society as a whole deals with their fears with humor, it makes things less scary. No, I Am Not A Counselor but I have talked to a few after some particularly nasty calls.
Chicken needs to be crispy, not people; check your smoke detector batteries now! We don't like finding you later.

Extreme vs Actual by CarlBenda · 2003-09-24 02:17 · Score: 1

It was interesting to that the article noted how in Extreme Programming people work in pairs and then goes on to mention "Sutton was the first person to see the names and data together, working alone one night." This is so common with Extreme Programming. Lack of a design is not good in the long run. Even the most basic of designs is better than nothing. It seems people use the name "Extreme Programming" as a facade for poor programming practices and then go right ahead and do what they really wanted to do; program by themselves without the responsibility of drawing up the most basic design.

Re:Extreme vs Actual by russh347 · 2003-09-24 16:13 · Score: 1

If you read even a little bit of the XP literature, you will find that it advocates continuous design, not a lack of design.

When you design all the time, and you get immediate feedback about how your design decisions are working out, ... you get better (even if you are good already).

Certainly, some people use XP as a facade for shoddy programming practices. XP requires discipline, the ability to want to do what is neccesary even if it is unpleasent. I'd love to revoke the scam artist's rights to claim that they are using XP, when they are really using Code/Fix/Pray.

Printing out a hardcopy of a design, so some PHB's can sign it, makes some people feel better. Not me... not after 20 years of seeing the requirements change every time the phone rings.
Re:Extreme vs Actual by CarlBenda · 2003-09-24 17:46 · Score: 1

I've read plenty (including Beck's defining book) and did it to the extreme for six months with some joker that even Beck was quoted as saying was a great software guy. Oh by the way this idiot had 40 years of experience.
Design is not what you do the next minute it's what you decide to do for quite a while longer. If you don't anticipate some things you are not doing design. I'm not talking anything big here. Deciding to make a server able to handle more than one client is a design decision based on the future. XP would have you say don't even do that since the requirement might change and doing the simplest thing first is the best policy. Handle one client and you can refactor to handle more. Sounds idiotic? That's XP.
XP requires no discipline. That's why you've got your pair programming buddy next to you to keep you on the straight and narrow. It's such a boring methodology that part of your work is keeping each other awake. XP is Test/Code/Fix/Pray. You almost had it.
Hey I've got 15 years of experience. Your 20 years means nothing to me. I know 50 years olds who have been out in the workforce that aren't worth the price of a 5 year experience guy. Argue by authority with someone else.
The requirements always changed and if you were smart about it you came up with a flexible design that let you make quite a bit of change. If the requirements change all over the place without much meaning you should have figured out the company was messed up like hell and it was only a matter of time before it failed. If it hasn't yet then what you are doing isn't all that important to them.
Read the books. I've got tons but experience with XP just shows it to be the old debugging into existence that after a few months defines the meaning of spaghetti code.
BTW if the phone rings all the time... that means your a support guy not a developer.

Made In The USA! by webzombie · 2003-09-24 02:25 · Score: 1

This is probably one of the sickest fuckin' attempts to cash in on the events of 911 yet.

So is this in case the current piss off the world strategy doesn't work and we need accurate body counts and identifications for CNN!

Fuckin' sick!

needs more nines by diamond0 · 2003-09-24 03:08 · Score: 1

99.9% accuracy rate means it fails for every 1 in 1000 uses. IIRC, there were more than 3000 fatailities on 9/11.

--

--
There is no hatred more pure and true than that expressed by children.

So how do you test this? by brusstoc · 2003-09-24 03:22 · Score: 1

Start a war? Follow a natural disaster around? Sponsor terrorists? Get tickets to a rock concert?

Re:Cash, Howard Cash by goretexguy · 2003-09-24 04:46 · Score: 1

In the case of the WTC, there will never be %100 identification.
First, many victims were simply incinerated. The fires burned through December, and there are thousands of calcified (no biomatter left) bones.
Second, not all relatives stepped forward to provide material to enable genetic identification.
Third, they are still finding remains, so there is more information to be added to the system.

Given the situation, it's amazing that so many have been identified.

*sigh* by jared_hanson · 2003-09-25 04:03 · Score: 1

I guess the misunderstanding of my comments in this thread will never end. The sad part is, what you said is the exact point I was trying to make, yet you give me hell. I give up! *throws hands in air*

--
-- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.

Slashdot Mirror

Mass Fatality Identification System

137 comments